Keimåelia 'ekklåesiastika, The historical and miscellaneous tracts of the Reverend and learned Peter Heylyn, D.D. now collected into one volume ... : and an account of the life of the author, never before published : with an exact table to the whole.

CHAP. XVIII. A Declaration of the Doctrine in the Points disputed under the new establishment made by Queen Elizabeth.

• 1. the Doctrine of the second Book of Ho∣milies concerning the wilful fall of Adam, the miserable estate of man, the restitu∣tion of lost man in Jesus Christ, and the universal redemption of all man-kind by his death and passion.
• 2. The doctrine of the said second Book con∣cerning universal grace, the possibility of a total and final falling, and the co-operation of mans will with the grace of God.
• 3. The judgment of Reverend Bishop Jewel, touching the universal redemption of man∣kind by the death of Christ; Predestination grounded upon faith in Christ, and reached out unto all them that believe in him, by Mr. Alexander Poynets.
• 4. Dr. Harsnet in his Sermon at St. Pauls Cross, Anno 1584. sheweth that the ab∣solute decree of Reprobation turneth the truth of God into a lie, and makes him to be the Author of sin.
• 5. That it deprives man of the natural free∣dom of his will, makes God himself to be double minded, to have two contrary wills, and to delight in mocking his poor Creature, Man.
• 6. And finally, that it makes God more cruel and unmerciful than the greatest Tyrant, contrary to the truth of Scripture, and the constant Doctrine of the Fathers.
• 7. The rest of the said Sermon reduced unto certain other heads, directly contrary to the Calvinian Doctrines in the points disputed.
• 8. Certain considerations on the Sermon afore∣said, with reference to the subject of it, as also to the time, place, and persons, in and before which it was first preached. An Answer to some Objections concerning a pre∣tended Recantation falsly affirmed to have been made by the said Mr. Harsnet.
• 10. That in the judgment of the Right Learned Dr. King, after Bishop of Lon∣don, the alteration of Gods denounced judg∣ments in some certain cases infers no alte∣ration in his Counsels; the difference be∣tween the changing of the will, and to will a charge.
• 11. That there is something in Gods decrees revealed to us, and something concealed unto himself, the difference between the in∣feriour and superiour causes, and of the conditionalty of Gods threats and promises.
• 12. The accommodating of the former part of this discourse to the case of the Ninevites.
• 13. And not the case of the Ninevites to the case disputed.

THese Obstacles being thus removed, [unspec I] I shall proceed unto a Declaration of the Churches Doctrine under this new establishment, made by Queen Elizabeth. And first, all Arguments derived from the publick Liturgy, and the first book of Ho∣milies being still in force; we will next see what is delivered in the Homilies of the second part, establisht by a special Article, and thereby made a part of the doctrine here by Law established: And first, as touching the doctrine of Predestination, it is declared in the Homily of the Nativity, That as in Adam all men universally sinned; so in Adam all men received the reward of sin; that is to say, became mortal and subject unto death, having in themselves nothing but everlasting condemnation, both of body and soul; that man being in this wretched case, ti pleased God to make a new Covenant with him, namely, that he would send a Mediator or Messias into the world which should make intercession, and put him∣self as a stay between both parties, to pacifie wrath and indignation conceived against sin, and to deliver man out of the miserable curse, and cursed misery, whereunto he was fallen head∣long, by disobeying the Will and Commandment of the only Lord and Maker. Nor, secondly, was this deliverance and redemption partial, intended only for a few, but general and universal for all man-kind; the said Homily telling us not long after, that all this was done to the end, the promise and covenant of God made unto Abraham and his Posterity, concerning the Redemp∣tion of the World, might be credited and believed—to deliver man-kind from the bitter curse of the Law, and make perfect satisfaction by his death for the sins of all People.— For the accomplishment whereof, It was expedient, saith the Homily, that our Medi∣ator should be such an one as might take upon him the sins of Man-kind, and sustain the due punishment thereof, viz. Death—to the intent he might more fully and perfectly make satisfaction for man-kind: which is as plain as words can make it, and yet not more plain than that which followeth in the Homily of the worthy receiving of the Sa∣crament, Fol. 200.

Nor doth the Homily speak less plainly in another place concerning Universal Grace, [unspec II] than it doth speak to this in reference to Universal Redemption, as appears evidently by the first part of the Sermon against the peril of Idolatry, in which it is declared in the way of paraphrase on some passages in the 40. Chapter of the Prophet Isaiah, That it had been preached to men from the beginning, and how by the Creation of the World, and the greatness of the work, they might understand the Majesty of God, the Creator and Maker of all things to be greater than it should be expressed in any image or bodily similitude. And therefore by the light of the same instruction (had they not shut their eyes against it) they might have come unto a further knowledg of the Will of God; and by degrees to the performance of all moral duties required of them before Christ coming in the flesh. And in the third part of the same Sermon there are some passages which do as plainly speak of falling from God, the final alienation of the Soul of a man once righteous, from his love and favour. Where it is said, how much better in were that the Arts of Painting, and we had never been found, than one of them whose Souls are so precious in the sight of God, should by occasion of Image or Picture, perish and be lost. And what can here be understood, by the souls which are so precious in the sight of God, but the souls of the Elect, of justified and righteous per∣sons, the souls of wicked men being vile and odious in his sight, hated by God, as Esau was, before all Eternity, as the Calvinians do informs us. And what else can we understand by being perished and lost, but a total or final alienation of those precious souls, from his grace and favour: more plainly speaks the Homily of the Resurrection, in which the Church represents unto us, what shame it should be for us, being thus clearly and freely washed from our sin to return to the filthiness thereof again? What a folly it would be for us, being thus endued with Righteousness to lose in again? What a madness it would be to lose the inheritance we be now set in, for the vile and transitory pleasure of sins. And what an unkindness it would be, where our Saviour Christ of his mercy is come unto us, to dwell with us as our guest, to drive him from us, and to banish him violently out of our souls: And instead of him in whom is all grace and vertue to receive the ungracious spirit of the De∣vil, the founder of all naughtiness and mischief; than which there can be nothing more direct and positive to the point in hand. And as for the co-operation of mans will with the grace of God, either in accepting or resisting it, when once offered to him, besides what may be gathered from the former passages; it is to be presumed as a thing past question in the very nature of the book, for what else are those Homilies but so many proofs and arguments to evince that point. For to what purpose were they made, but to stir up the minds of all men to the works of piety: And what hopes could the Au∣thors of them give unto themselves of effecting that which they endeavoured, had they not presupposed and taught that there was such a freedom in the will of man, such an assistance of Gods grace, as might enable them to perform these works of piety, as in all and every one of the said Homilies are commended to them. More for the proof of which points, might be gathered from the said second book of Homilies; established by the Articles of Queen Elizabeth's time, as before is said, were not these sufficient. Proceed we therefore from the Homilies, [unspec III] and the publick Monuments of the Church to the judgment of particular persons, men of renown and eminent in their several places, amongst which we find incomparable Jewel, then Bishop of Salsbury, thus clearly speaking in behalf of Universal Redemption, viz. Ceerto animis nostris persua∣demus, &c.

We do assuredly persuade our minds (saith he) that Christ is the ob∣tainer of forgiveness for our sins; and that by his bloud all our spots of sins be wash∣ed clean: that he hath pacified and set at one all things by the bloud of his Cross: that he by the same one only Sacrifice which he once offered upon the Cross, hath brought to effect, and fulfilled all things: and that for the cause he said, it is finished. By which word (saith he) he plainly signified, persolutum jam esse pre∣tium, pro peccato humani generis, that the price or ransom was now fully paid for the sin of mankind.

Now as Bishop Jewel was a principal member of the House of Bi∣shops, so Mr. Nowel was the Prolocutor for the House of the Clergy, in which the Ar∣ticles were debated and agreed upon. In which respect his favour is much sought by those of the Calvinian party, as before was shewn. But finding no comfort for them in his larger Catechism, let us see what may be found in his Latin Catechism, autho∣rized to be taught in Schools, and published by his consent in the English Tongue, Anno 1572. And first he sheweth, that as God is said to be our Father for some other reasons, so most specially for this; quod nos divine per spiritum sanctum generavit, & per fidem in verum suum, atque naturalem filium Jesum Christum nos elegit, sibique Filios, &

regni Coelestis, atque sempiternae vitae heredes per eundem instituit, that is to say, because he hath divinely regenerated us (or begotten us again) by the Holy Ghost, and hath elected us by Faith in his true and natural Son Christ, Jesus, and through the same Christ hath adopted us to be his Children and Heirs of his heavenly Kingdom and of life everlasting. And if Election come by our faith in Christ, as he saith it doth, eni∣ther a Supra-lapsarian, nor a Sub-lapsarian, can find any comfort from this man, in favour of that absolute and irrespective decree of Predestination, which they would gladly father on him in his larger Catechism, and then as for the method of Prede∣stination, he thus sets it forth, viz. Deus Adamum illis honoris insignibus ornavit, ut ea cum sibi tum suis, id est, toto humano generi, aut servaret, aut amitteret, &c.

God (saith he) indued Adam with those Ornaments (that is to say) those Ornaments of Grace and Nature, which before we spake of) that he might have them or lose them for him∣self and his, that is to say, for all mankind. And it could not otherwise be, but that as of an evil Tree, evil fruits do spring: so that Adam being corrupted with sin, all the issue that came of him, must also be corrupted with that original sin; For delivery from the which there remained no remedy in our selves, and therefore God was pleased to proise that the seed of the Woman, which is Jesus Christ, should break the head of the Serpent, that is, of the Devil, who deceived our first Parents, and so should deliver them and their posterity that believed the same. Where first we have mans fall, Secondly, Gods mercy in his restitution. Thirdly, This restituti∣on to be made by Jesus Christ; and fourthly, to be made to all, which believe the same.

Proceed we next to a Lermon preached at St. Pauls Cross, Octob. 27. 1854. by Samuel Harsnet then fellow of Pembrook Hall in Cambridg, [unspec IV] and afterwards Master of the same, preferred from thence to the See of Chichester, from thence translated unto Norwich, and finally to the Archiepiscopal See of York. For the Text or subject of his Sermon, he made choice of those words in the Prophet Ezekiel, viz. As I live (saith the Lord) I delight not in the death of the wicked, Chap. 33. v. 11. In his Discourse upon which Text, he first dischargeth God from laying any necessity of sinning on the sons of men, and then delighting in their punishment because they have sinned: he thus breaks out against the absolute decree of Reprobation, which by that time had been made a part of the Zuinglian Gospel, and generally spread abroad both from Press and Puipit. There is a conceit in the World (saith he) speak little better of our gracious God than this, and that is, that God shoould design many thousands of souls to Hell before they were, not in eye to their faults, but to his own absolute will and power, and to get him glory in their damnation. This Opinion is grown high and monstrous, and like a Goliah, and men do shake and tremble at it; yet never a man reacheth to Davids sing to cast it down. In the name of the Lord of Hosts we will encounter it, for it hath reviled not the Host of the living God, but the Lord of Hosts.

First, That it is directly in opposition to this Text of holy Scripture, and so turns the truth of God into a lye. For whereas God in this Text doth say and swear, that he doth not de∣light in the death of man; this Opinion saith, that not one or two, but millions of men should fry in Hell; and that he made them for no other purpose than to be the children of death and hell, and that for no other cause but his meer pleasure sake; and so say, that God doth not only say, but will swear to a lye. For the Oath should have run thus, As I live (saith the Lord) I do delight in the death of man.

Secondly, it doth (not by consequence but) directly make God the Author of sin. For, if God without eye to sin did design men to hell, then did he say and set down that he should sin; for without sin he cannot come to hell: And indeed doth not this Opinion say, that the Almighty God in the eye of his Counsel, did not only see, but say that Adam should fall, and so order and decree, and set down his fall, that it was no more possible for him not to fall, than it was possible for him not to eat? And of that when God doth order, set down and decree (I trust) he is the Author, unless they will say, that when the Right honourable Lord Keeper doth say in open Court, We order, he means not to be the Author of that his Order.

Which said, he tells us Thirdly, that it takes away from Adam (in his state of innocency) all freedom of will and Liberty not to sin. For had he had freedom to have altered Gods designment, Adams liberty had been above the designment of God. And here I remember a little witty solution is made, that is, if we respect Adams Will, he had power to sin, but if Gods Decrees, he could not sin. This is a filly solution; And indeed it is as much as if you should take a sound, strong man that hath power to walk, and to lie still, and bind him hand and foot, (as they do in Bedlam) and

lay him down, and then bid him rise up and walk, or else you will stir him up with a whip; and he tell you, that there be chains upon him, so that he is not able to stir; and you tell him again, that, that is no excuse, for if he look upon his health, his strength, his legs, he hath power to walk, or to stand still; but if upon his Chains, indeed in that respect he is not able to walk. I trust he that should whip that man for not walking, were well worthy to be whipt himself: Fourthly, As God do abhor a heart, and a heart, and his soul detesteth also a double minded man: so himself cannot have a mind and a mind: a face like Janus, to look two ways. Yet this Opinion maketh in God two Wills, the one flat opposite to the other: An Hidden Will by which he appointed and willed that Adam should sin; and an open Will by which he forbad him to sin. His open Will said to Adam in Paradise, Adam thou shalt not eat of the Tree of good and evil: His Hidden Will said, Thou shalt eat; nay, now I my self cannot keep thee from eating, for my Decree from Eternity is pas∣sed, Thou shalt eat, that thou may drown all thy posterity into sin, and that I may drench them as I have designed, in the bottomless pit of Hell. Fifthly, Amongst all the Abomina∣tions of Queen Jezabel, that was the greatest (1 Kings 21.) when as hunting after the life of innocent Naboth, she set him up amongst the Princes of the Land, that so he might have the greater fall. God planted man in Paradise, (as in a pleasant Vineyard) and mounted him to the World as on a stage, and honoured him with all the Soveraignty, over all the Creatures; he put all things in subjection under his feet, so that he could not pass a decree from all Eternity against him, to throw him down head-long into Hell: for God is not a Jezabel, Tollere in altum, to lift up a man, ut lapsu graviore ruat, that he may make the greater noise with his fall.

But he goes on, [unspec VI] and having illustrated this cruel Mockery by some further instances, he telleth us, that the Poet had a device of their old Saturn, that he eat up his Children assoon as they were born, for fear least some of them should dispossess him of Heaven. Pharaoh King of Egypt, had almost the same plea, for he made away all the young Hebrew Males lest they should multiply too fast: Herod for fear our Saviour Christ should supplant him in his Kingdom, caused all the young Children to be slain: those had all some colour for their barbarous cruelty But if any of those had made a Law, designing young Children to torments before they had been born; and for no other cause and purpose, but his own absolute will; the Heavens in course would have called for revenge, It is the Law of Nations, that no man innocent shall be condemned; of Reason not to hate, where we are not hurt; of Nature to like and love her own brood, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (saith the holy Ghost) we are Gods Kindred, he cannot hate us when we are innocent, when we are nothing, when we are not. Now touching Gods Glory (which is to us all as dear as our life) this Opinion hath told us, a very inglorious and shameful Tale, for it saith, the Almighty God would have many souls go to Hell; and that they may come thither, they must sin, that so he may have just cause to condemn them. Who doth not smile at the Grecians Conceit, that gave their God a glorious title for killing of flies? Gods Glory in punishing ariseth from his Justice in revenging of sin: and for that it tells us, as I said, a very sad and unpleasant Tale; for who could digest it to hear a Prince say after this manner? I will beget met a Son, that I may kill him, that I may so get me a name, I will beget him without both his feet, and when he is grown up, having no feet, I will command him to walk upon pain of death: and when he breaketh my Commandment, I will put him to death. O beloved, these glorious fancies, imaginations and shews, are far from the nature of our gracious, merciful and glo∣rious God, who hath proclaimed himself in his Titles Royal, Jehovah, the Lord, the Lord strong and mighty, and terrible, slow to anger, and of great goodness: And therefore let this conceit be far from Jacob, and let it not come near the Tents of Joseph. How much holier and heavenlier conceit had the holy Fathers of the Justice of God? Non est ante pu∣nitor Deus, quam peccator homo, God put not on the person of a Revenger, before man put on the person of an Offender, saith St. Ambrose. Neminem coronat antequam vincit; neminem punit antequam peccat; he crowns none before he overcomes, and he punisheth no man before his offence. Et qui facit miseros ut miseratur, crudelem habet misere∣cordiam, he that puts man into miseries that he may pity him, hath no kind, but a cruel pity.

The absolute decree of Reprobation being thus discharged, [unspec VII] he shews in the next place, that as God desireth not the death of man without relation to his sin, so he de∣sireth not the death of the sinful man, or of the wicked sinful man, but rather that they shoudl turn from their wickedness and live. And he observes it is said unto the Goats in St. Matthews Gospel, Ite malidicti in ignem paratum;

he doth not say, Ma∣ledicti patris, Go ye cursed of the Father; (as it is Benedicti patris, when he speaks

of the sheep) God intituling himself to the blessing only; and that the fire is pre∣pared, but for whom? Non vobis, sed Diabolo & Angelis ejus, not for you, but for the Devil and his Angels. So that God delighteth to prepare neither Death nor Hell for damned men. The last branch of his Discourse he resolves into six consequences, as links depending on his Chain: 1. Gods absolute Will is not the cause of Re∣probation, but sin. 2. No man is of an absolute necessity the child of Hell, so as by Gods grace he may not avoid it. 3. God simply willeth every living soul to be saved, and to come to the Kingdom of Heaven. 4. God sent his Son to save every soul, and to bring it to the Kingdom of Heaven. 5. God offereth Grace effectually to save every one, and to direct him to the Kingdom of Heaven. 6. The nelgect and contempt of this Grace, is the cause why every one doth not come to Heaven, and not any privative Decree, Council and Determination of God.

The stating and canvasing of which points, so plainly, curtly to the Doctrines of che old Zuinglian Gospellers, and the modern Calvinians; as they take up the rest of the Sermon, so to the Sermon I refer the Reader for his furtehr satisfaction in them. I note this only in the close, that there is none of the five Arminian Articles (as they commonly call them) which is not contained in terms express; or may not easily be found by way of Deduction in one or more of the six consequences before recited.

Now in this Sermon there are sundry things to be considered, as namely, first, [unspec VIII] That the Zuinglian or Calvinian Gospel in these points, was grown so strong, that the Preacher calls it their Goliah; so huge and monstrous, that many quaked and trembled at it, but none, that is to say, but few or none, vel duo, vel nemo, in the words of Persius, durst take up Davids sling to throw it down. Secondly, That in canvasing the absolute Decree of Reprobation, the Preacher spared none of those odious aggravations which have been charged upon the Doctrines of the modern Calvinists by the Remonstrants, and their party in these latter times. Thirdly, That the Sermon was preached at St. Pauls Cross, the greatest Auditory of the Kingdom, consisting not only of the Lord Mayor, the Aldermen, and the rest of the chief men in the City, but in those times of such Bishops, and other learned men as lived occasionally in London, and the City of Westminster, as also of the Judges and most learned Lawyers, some of the Lords of the Council being for the most part present also. Fourthly, That for all this we can∣not find, that any offence was taken at it, or any Recantation enjoyned upon it, either by the high Commission, or Bishop of London, or any other having Authority in the Church of England, nor any complaint made of it to the Queen, or the Council-Table, as certainly there would have been, if the matter of the Sermon had been con∣trary to the Rules of the Church, and the appointments of the same. And finally we may observe, that though he was made Archbiship of York in the Reign of King Charles, 1628. when the times are thought to have been inclinable, to those of the Arminian Doctrines, yet he was made Master of Pembrook Hill, Bishop of Chichester, and from thence translated unto Norwich, in the time of King James. And thereupon we may conclude, that King James neither thought this Doctrine to be against the Articles of Religion, here by Law established, nor was so great an Enemy to them, or the men that held them, as some of our Calvinians have lately made him.

But against this it is objected by Mr. Prin in his book of Perpetuity, [unspec IX] &c. printed at London in the year 1627. 1. That the said Mr. Harsnet was convented for this Ser∣mon, and forced to recant it as Heretical. 2. That upon this Sermon, and the Contro∣versies that arose upon it in Cambridg between Baroe and Whitacres, not only the Ar∣ticles of Lambeth were composed (of which more hereafter) but Mr. Wotton was appointed by the University to confute the same. 3. That the siad Sermon was so far from being published or printed, that it was injoyned by Authority to be recanted. For Answer whereunto, it would first be known, where the said Sermon was recanted, and by whose Authority. Not in or by the University of Cambridg, where Mr. Harsnet lived both then, and a long time after; for the Sermon was preached at St. Pauls Cross, and so the University could take no cognisance of it, nor proceed against him for the same. And if the Recantation was madea t St. Pauls Cross, where the sup∣posed offence was given, it would be known by whose Authority it was enjoyned. Not by the Bishop of London, in whose Diocess the Sermon was preached: for his Au∣thority did not reach so far as Cambridg, whither the Preacher had retited after he had performed the service he was called unto: and if it were injoyned by the High Com∣mission, and performed accordingly, there is no question to be made, but that we should have heard of in the Anti-Arminianism, where there are no less than eight leaves

spend in relating the story of a like Recantation pretended to be made by one Mr. Barret on the tenth of May 1595. and where it is affirmed, that the said Mr. Harsnet held and maintained the same errors for which Barret was to make his Recantation. But as it will be proved hereafter that no such Recantation wass made by Barret, so we have reason to believe that no such Recantation was imposed on Harsnet. Nor, secondly, can it be made good, that the Controversies between Doctor Whitacres and Dr. Baroe were first occasioned by this Sermon, or that Mr. Wotton was appointed by the University to confute the same. For it appears by a Letter written from the heads of that Uni∣versity to their Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer Burleigh. dated March 18. 1595. that Baroe had maintained the same Doctrines, and his Lectures and Determinations above 14 years before, by their own account, for which see Chap. 21. Numb. 80. which must be three years at the least before the preaching of that Sermon by Mr. Harsnet. And though it is probable enopugh that Mr. Wotton might give himself the trouble of con∣futing the Sermon, yet it is more than probable that he was not required so to do by that University. For if it had been so appointed by the University, he would have been rewarded for it by the same power and authority which had so appointed, when he appeared a Candidate for the Professorship on the death of Whitacres, but could not find a party of sufficient power to carry it for him, of which see also Chap. 21. Numb. 4. And thirdly, as for the not Priting of the Sermon, it is easily answered; the genius of the time, not carrying men so generally to the Printing of Sermons as it hath done since. But it was Printed at the last, though long first: And being Printed at the last, hath met with none so forward in the Confutation, as Mr. Wotton is affirmed to be, when at first it was Preached. And therefore notwithstanding these three surmises which the Author of the Perpetuity, &c. hath presented to us, it may be said for certain, as be∣fore it was, that Mr. Harsnet was never called in question for that Sermon of his, by any having Authority to convent him for it, and much less, that he ever made any such Recantation, as by the said Author is suggested.

In the next place we will behold a passage in one of the Lectures upon Jonah, [unspec X] deli∣vered at York, Anno 1594. by the right learned Dr. John King (discended from a Bro∣ther of Robert King, the first Bishop of Oxon) afterwards made Dean of Christ Church, and from thence presented by the power and favour of Archbishop Bancroft to the See of London: A Prelate of too known a zeal to the Church of England to be accused of Popery, or any other Heterodoxies in Religion, of what sort soever, who in his Le∣cture on these words, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown, cap. 3. verse 4. discoursed on them in this manner.

The only matter of Question herein, is how it may stand with the constancy and truth of eternal God to pronounce a Judgment against a place which taketh not effect within one hundred years: For either he weas ignorant of his own time, which we cannot imagine of an omniscient God, or his mind was altered, which is unpro∣ble to suspect. For is the strength of Israel a man that he should lie, or as the Son of man that be should repent? Is he not yesterday, and to day, and the same for ever? that was, that is, and that which is to come? I mean not only in substance, but in Will and Intention? Doth he use lightness? Are the words that he speaketh, yea and nay? Doth he both affirm and deny too? Are not all his Promises, are not all his Threatnings, are not all his Mercies, are not all his Judgments, are not all his Words, are not all the titles and jots of his words, yea and amen? so firmly ratified, that they cannot be broken: Doubtless it shall stand immutable, When the Heaven and the Earth shall be changed, and wax old like a garment, Ego Deus & non mutor, I am God that am not changed. The School in this respect hath a wise distinction, It is one thing to change the will, and another to will a change, or to be willed that a change should be. God will have the Law and Ceremony at one time, Gospel without Ceremony at another, this was his Will from Everlasting, constant and unmoveable, that in their several courses both should be. Though there be a change in the matter and subject, there is not a change in him that disposeth it. Our Will is in Winter to use the fire, in Sum∣mer a cold and an open air; the thing is changed according to the season; but our Will whereby we all decreed and determined in our selves so to do, remain the same.

Sometimes the Decrees and purposes of God consist of two parts, [unspec XI] the one whereof God revealeth at the first, and the other he concealeth a while, and keepeth in his own knowledge; as in the action enjoyned to Abraham, the purpose of God was two∣fold: 1. To try his Obedience. 2. To save the Child. A man may impute it incon∣stancy

to bid and unbid: but that the Will of the Lord was not plenarily understood in the first part. This is it which Gregory expresseth in apt terms, God changeth his in∣tent pronounced sometimes, but never his Counsel intended. Sometimes things are decreed and spoken of according to inferiour cause, which by the highest and over∣ruling cause are otherwise disposed of. One might have said, and said truly both ways, Lazarus shall rise again, and Lazarus shall not rise again: if we esteem it by the power and finger of God it shall be; but if we leave it to nature, and to the arm of flesh, it shall never be. The Prophet Esay told Hezekias the King, put thy house in or∣der, for thou shalt die: considering the weakness of his body, and the extremity of his disease, he had reason to warrant the same; but if he told him contrariwise, accor∣ding to that which came to pass, thou shalt not die, looking to the might and merecy of God, who received the prayers of the King, he had said as truly. But the best defi∣nition is, that in most of these threatning there is a condition annexed unto them, ei∣ther exprest or understood, which is as the hinges to the door, and turneth forward and backward the whole matter. In Jeremy it is exprest, I will speak suddenly against a Nation or a Kingdom, to pluck it up, to root it out, and to destroy it: But if this Nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their wickedness, I will repent of the plague which I thought to bring upon them. So likewise for his mercy, I will speak suddenly concerning a Nation, and concerning a Kingdom, to build it, and to plant it; but if yet do evil in my sight, and hear not my voice, I will repent of the good I thought to do for them. Gen. 20. it is exprest, where God telleth Abimeleck, with-holding Abrahams Wife, Thou art a dead man, because of the Woman which thou hast taken: the event fell out otherwise, and Abimeleck purged himself with God, With an upright mind, and innocent hands have I done this. There is no question but God inclosed a condition with his speech, Thou art a dead man, if thou restore not the Woman withoput touching her body and dis∣honouring her Husband.

Thus we may answer the scruple by all these ways. 1. [unspec XII] Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown, and yet forty and forty days and Nineveh shall not be overthrown. Wy? Because Nineveh is changed, and the unchangable will of God ever was, that if Nineveh shewed a change, it should be spared. 2. There were two parts of Gods purpose, the one disclosed, touching the subversion of Nineveh, the other of her con∣version, kept within the heart of God. Whereupon he changed the sentence pro∣nounced, but not the counsel whereunto the sentence weas referred. 3. If you consider Nineveh in the inferiour cause, that is in the deservings of Inineveh, it shall fall to the ground; but if you take it in the superiour cause, in the goodness and clemency of Almighty God, Nineveh shall escape. Lastly, the judgment was pronounced with a condition reserved in the mind of the judge, Nineveh shall be overthrown if it repent not. Now he that speaketh with condition, may change his mind without suspition of lightness. As Paul promised the Corinthians to come to them in his way towards Macedonia, and did it not: For he evermore added in his soul that condition which no man must exclude, if it stand with the pleasure of God, and he hinder me not. Philip threatned the Lacedemonians, that if he invaded their Country, he would utterly ex∣tinguish them: They wrote him no other answer but this, If, meaning it was a con∣dition well put in, because he was never like to come amongst them,

Si nisi non esset, perfectum quidlibet esset.

If it were not for conditions and exceptions, every thing would be perfect, but nothing more unperfect than Nineveh, if this secret condition of the goodness of God at the se∣cond hand had not been.

So far this Reverend Prelate hath discoursed of the nature of Gods decrees, [unspec XIII] and ac∣commodated his discourse thereof to the case of the Ninevites. Let us next see how far the principal particulars of the said discourse, and the case of the Ninevites it self my be accommodated to the Divine decree of Predestination; concerning which the said Reverend Prelate was not pleased to declare his judgment, either as being imper∣tinent to the case which he had in hand, or out of an unwillingness to engage himself in those disputes which might not suddenly be ended. All that he did herein, was to take care for laying down such grounds in those learned Lectures, by which his judg∣ment might be guessed at, though not declared. As Dr. Peter Baroe (of whom more hereafter) declared his judgment touching the Divine Decrees in the said case of the Ninevites, before he fell particularly on the Doctrine of Predestination, as he after did.

And first, as for accommodating the case of the Ninevites to the matter which is now be∣fore us, we cannot better do it than in the words of Bishop Hooper, so often men∣tioned; who having told us that Esau was no more excluded from the promise of grace than Jacob was, proceedeth thus, viz.

By the Scripture (saith he) it seemeth that the sentence of God was given to save the one, and damn the other, before the one loved God, or the other hated him. Howbeit, these threatnings of god against Esau (if he had not of his wilful malice excluded himself from the promise of grace) should no more have hindred his salvation, than Gods threatnings against Nineveh, (which notwithstanding that God said should be destroyed within forty days, stood a great time after, and did penance. Esau was circumcised, and presented unto the Church of God by his Father Isaac in all external Ceremonies as well as Jacob.

And that his life and conversation was not as agreeable unto justice and equity as Jacobs was, the sentence of God unto Rebecca was not in the fault, but his own malice. Out of which words we may observe, first, that the sentence of God concerning Esau, was not the cause that his conversation was so little agreeable to justice and equity; no more than the judgment denounced against the Ninevites could have been the cause of their impenitency, if they had continued in their sins and wickednesses without re∣pentance; contrary to the Doctrine of the Gospellers in Queen Maries days, impu∣ting all mens sins to Predestination. Secondly, that Gods threatnings against Esau (supposing them to be tanta-mount to a reprobation) could no more have hindred his salvation, than the like threatning against the Ninevites could have sealed to them the assurance of their present destruction; if he had heartily repented of his sins, as the Ninevites did. And therefore thirdly, as well the decree of God concerning Esau, as that which is set out against the Ninevites, are no otherwise to be understood than un∣der the condition tacitly annexed unto them; that is to say, that the Ninevites should be destroyed within forty days, if they did not repent them of their sins; and that Esau should be reprobated to eternal death, if he gave himself over to the lusts of a sen∣sual appetite: Which if it be confessed for true, as I think it must, then fourthly, the promises made by God to Jacob, and to all such as are beloved of God, as Jacob was, and consequently their election unto life eternal, are likewise to be understood with the like condition; that is to say, if they repent them of their sins, and do unfainedly be∣lieve his holy Gospel. The like may be affirmed also in all the other particulars touching Gods decrees, with reference to the Doctrine of Predestination, which are observed or accommodated by that learned Prelate in the case of the Ninevites, had I sufficient time and place to insist upon them.

Notes

• Hom. p. 172.
• Hom. 1. part against the peril.
• Hom. of the Resurrection. p. 139.
• Bishop Jewels Def••n. Apo∣log. c. 18. De∣vis. 1.
• Catec. Edi∣tion c. 1••54. p. 19
• Ibid. 22.
• Mr. Harnets Sermon at Pauls Cross bound up at the end of Dr. Stewards three Ser∣mons, printed 1••58. p. 1••3. &c.
• Ibid. p. 135.
• Ibid. p. 140.
• Ibid. 48.
• Perpetulty, &c. 304.
• Bishop King's Lecture upon Jonath, Lect. 33. p. 450.
• Numb. 23. Heb. 13. Rev. 1.
• 2 Cor. 1.
• Mal. 3.
• Aliud mutare voluntatem, aliud velle mu∣tationem. A∣quin. 1. qu. 19. art. 7.
• Mutat seo tentiam non mutat consili∣um. lib. 10. mor. cap. 23.
• Esa. 38.
• Jer. 18.
• Jer. 18.
• 2 Cor. 1.
• Pres. to his Expos. on the ten Command¦ments.